Date of Filing              :  18 March 2020.

Date of Judgement     :  27 December 2022.

Mr. Dhiraj Kumar Dey,   Hon’ble Member.

            The instant case arises when Sri Kamal Bhuiya, the Complainant, filed a complaint U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, herein after called the said Act, against 1) the Alchemist Township India Ltd., 2) Kanwar Deep Singh,  3) Karan Deep Singh, 4) The Branch Manager, Alchemist Township India Ltd. and 5) C. S. Jolly (herein after called as Opposite Parties or O Ps. alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O Ps.

            The brief statement of the complaint is that the Complainant, while in search of a plot of land in Punjab or its surrounding for construction of his dwelling house, came in contact with the O. Ps. and after a long discussion with the O. Ps. he agreed to purchase a plot/villa/apartment in the housing project of the O. Ps. at Park Avenue, Talwandi Bhai, Tehsil Zeera, Dist. Firozpur, Punjab. Complainant paid a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- to the O. Ps. and the O. P. company issued a certificate bearing no. TA00315075, dated 03/07/2013, allotted with Customer ID No. TC00159491.  Thereafter the complainant enquired about the development of the project at the branch office of the O. P. Company, but he could not get any satisfactory information from the branch office. The complainant even visited the project site in November 2015, March 2016, February 2018 and in January 2020 and no progress in the project was seen by him.  Later the complainant was affirmed by the employees of the O. P. Company that the project was abandoned by the company. Seeing no hope in acquiring his desired plot the complainant requested the O. P. company to refund his deposited money and again he was disappointed as the O. P. company failed to refund his hard earned money.  Finding no other way to get back his investment he filed this instant complaint praying for refund his money with interest, compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- together with litigation cost of Rs, 20,000/- and others as the commission decides.

            The Complainant submitted copy of the Certificate of property allotment mentioned herein above as annexure to the complaint.

            On perusal of records it appears that in spite of service of notice and repeated opportunities given no step were taken by the O Ps, consequently the case proceeded ex parte.  On prayer of the complainant the name of O. P. 5 was expunged from the complaint petition, as the complainants stated that they had added the O. P. 5 wrongly, vide Order No. 13, dated 04/03/2021.

       During the course of the trial the complainants prayed to treat their complaint petition as the affidavit-in-chief and ultimately argument has been heard. They did not file any brief note of argument.

      The only points required to be determined here are whether there is any deficiency in service occurred by the O Ps and whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.  As the O Ps did to not take part in contesting the complaint these two points are taken together for the sake of convenience and brevity in discussion.

      Original documents in support of the complaint are taken into consideration for decision.

Decision with reasons

        It is a fact that the Complainant paid some amount intending to purchase a plot of land for constructing a house from the O. P. Company.  The complainant has not submitted any receipt in support of his payment. But the O. P. company has issued a Certificate on 03/07/2013 bearing No. TA00315075 in which it is written as:  “We are in receipt of your application dated 19/06/2013 expressing your interest to acquire plot/vill/apartment in our housing project at Park Avenue, Talwandi Bhai, Tehsil: Zeera, Dist: Firozpur, Punjab has been allotted Customer ID No. TC00159491.”            It is also stated in this Certificate that:  “in the event of your not accepting allotment of plot/villa/apartment offered to you by us, from time to time for any reason whatsoever, we shall refund the amounts received, together with compensation assessed by us, depending upon appreciation in the value of Real Estate, which in any event, shall not be less than Rs.2,00,000/- (TWO LAKH ONLY) subject to deduction of applicable taxes and administrative costs, if any. Our decision with regard to the amount of compensation will be final.”

             These above statements of the Certificate acknowledge payment made by the complainant/purchaser, though exact amount is not disclosed. The O. P. company assured to return ‘not less than Rs. 2,00,000/-‘.  They assured the purchaser/complainant to offer plot/villa/apartment within a period of ‘Three Years Four Months’.  They also assured to offer plot/villa/apartment in another project if it was not possible to allot the complainant his desired plot in that particular project.  Thus it is clear that the complainant/purchaser has paid some money to purchase a plot of land from the O. P. Company and the O. P. Company has failed to comply with their promise within ‘Three Years Four Months’ from the date of issue of the Certificate, i. e. within 21/11/2016.  It is a settled principle that a purchaser cannot wait for an indefinite period to acquire a plot. After a long period of seven years from the date of his payment the complainant found that there is only one way to get relief and thus this case arises. This certificate was signed by the O P No. 5 being the Director of O. P. – 1 company, who was subsequently expunged from the complaint petition.  This fact clearly states that the complainant is a consumer to the O P 1 company as defined in the C. P. Act. 

            Here it is pertinent to state that, as per written statement of the complaint, O. Ps. failed to comply with their promised offers within the stipulated time thereby causing deficiency in service from their part.  As the O. Ps. are refrained from challenging the complaint so there is no contrary material to counter or rebut the claim of the complainant. Hence the complainant is entitled to get relief.

           Thus this Commission thinks the complaint is maintainable on its merit and the Complainant has every right to get his grievance be redressed in the form of repayment of the amount he has deposited together with compensation in the form of interest and litigation cost for such deficiency in service occurred from O Ps part.  It is informed that this case was filed through the Consumer Assistance Bureau run by the State Consumer Welfare Fund, West Bengal.  So litigation cost is to be paid to this Fund, partly of which to be paid to the concerned Advocate through whom the complainant filed his complaint.

Hence,

 it is

ORDERED

            That the complaint Case being No. CC/127/2020  is allowed ex-parte against O. P. Nos. 1 to 4.

The Opposite Parties are directed to pay Rs.2,00,000/- to the complainant along with interest on the said sum at the rate of 9% with effect from 21/11/2016 within 60 days from the date of this order. 

The O. Ps. are also directed to pay a sum of Rs. 7,000/- as litigation cost of which Rs.5,000/- to be paid to the account of SCWF, WB, and Rs.2,000/- to be paid to the complainant  within the aforesaid period.   

Complainant is directed to hand over the original certificate bearing No. TA00315075, dated 03/07/2013 to the O. Ps. on receipt of the full payment.